KVR Audio

topaz · Post by **topaz** » Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:29 pm

2 finger delete module

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Wed Oct 16, 2019 9:10 pm

topaz wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:29 pm 2 finger delete module

Thank you! That did it.

EnochLight · Post by **EnochLight** » Thu Oct 17, 2019 2:03 am

Bought it. Worst iOS synth app ever. Totally not getting it and it only comes with 5 presets. I mean I realize it’s only $8 USD, bit still. I want my money back.

topaz · Post by **topaz** » Thu Oct 17, 2019 7:15 am

Then modular is not for you,

Unless this is a parody post.

EnochLight wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 2:03 am Bought it. Worst iOS synth app ever. Totally not getting it and it only comes with 5 presets. I mean I realize it’s only $8 USD, bit still. I want my money back.

EnochLight · Post by **EnochLight** » Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:48 am

topaz wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2019 7:15 am Then modular is not for you,

Unless this is a parody post.

Nope - not a parody. I just think modular can be handled easier. Complex-1 is a great example - it comes with hundreds of presets that all sound incredible.

CrystalWizard · Post by **CrystalWizard** » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:17 pm

Not enough presets on a modular

thecontrolcentre · Post by **thecontrolcentre** » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:34 pm

CrystalWizard wrote: ↑Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:17 pm Not enough presets on a modular

Apparently

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:37 pm

I don't see why there couldn't be (more) presets on software modulars. IMO, it's not a unreasonable request.

Modulars suck though. IMO.

topaz · Post by **topaz** » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:44 pm

Never going to learn to patch with loads of presets.

But hey, you say potato, I say .... etc

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:47 pm

Yeah, i get that. Same way you will never learn how to program a synth when you use presets.

I do believe a lot of people tweak presets though. So, that's that, i guess.

topaz · Post by **topaz** » Mon Nov 04, 2019 2:15 pm

GrayScale killed off the fundamental modules in MiRack.

What a stupid thing to do for his reputation and future sales when VCVrack 2 goes payware.

EnochLight · Post by **EnochLight** » Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:01 pm

topaz wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 2:15 pm GrayScale killed off the fundamental modules in MiRack.

What a stupid thing to do for his reputation and future sales when VCVrack 2 goes payware.

Wait.. what?!

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:37 pm

topaz wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 2:15 pm GrayScale killed off the fundamental modules in MiRack.

What a stupid thing to do for his reputation and future sales when VCVrack 2 goes payware.

I don't think one has anything to do with the other.

The basic story, as I understand it, was something like (and I'm just paraphrasing and recapping here - if any involved parties want to jump in to clarify - feel free, I'm not saying this version of events is 100% accurate and the involved parties may see things differently and not agree on the facts anyway)...

1. The Mi Rack developer looked at the 0.6 VCV Rack license and said, "oh, I can port this to iOS and release it for a few bucks" - nothing necessarily wrong with that, but this rubbed some people the wrong way. The 1.x version of Rack uses a different license that wouldn't allow for this, but the 0.6 version was more permissive.

2. The Mi Rack developer ported open source modules, and went so far as to include those license agreements and even donation links to those developers where available in the Mi Rack port. Kind of a nice thing to do, hopefully resulting in some donations. But again, didn't ask permission in advance. Seems most developers were generally ok with this, but some others may not have appreciated their work to go into someone else's commercial product without any kind of head's up.

3. In at least some instances, the license agreement for the ported VCV modules covered the code, but not the graphics. So the Mi Rack guy was actually in violation of some license terms when he ported graphics he wasn't authorized to use - at least for some modules.

4. Then came a whole back on forth on "derivative art" around the Fundamentals modules. The Mi Rack developer changed the graphics, but the original designer still wasn't pleased and felt the new work was still derivative. My understanding is whoever owned the graphics basically asked that the fundamentals be taken down due to the artwork. Don't know if Andrew (VCV creator) did too, but he was very unhappy with how this was handled. There's a post from him clarifying the new VCV Rack license and why it was chosen on their forums. Anyway, the Mi Rack developer also aired some private conversations with the graphic designer in at least one public forum. Not a great move IMO.

5. Ultimately, the Fundamentals modules were pulled from Mi Rack. Existing patches can still be loaded with them. But if you search for Fundamentals in Mi Rack, you mostly get the Bog Audio stuff. Not the VCV stuff. Seems like a decent compromise to me.

6. Due to the more restrictive VCV Rack license agreement with the v1 work, there would've been no way for Mi Rack to have continued with things like polyphony, new modules, etc. At least, not without some kind of blessing from the various developers. So Mi Rack was always destined to be a port of an older version of the code-base.

7. In response to Topaz, I'm not sure how pulling the Fundamentals modules from Mi Rack has anything to do with future sales of VCV Rack v2. Mi Rack was never a true VCV Rack on iOS port. Who knows, one day we may still see VCV Rack on iPad, but as mentioned above, Mi Rack was always based on an older codebase and wouldn't have been possible at all with the v1 code. Unless you just mean that the VCV Rack reputation may have been harmed as a result of this. If so, I'm not sure how big the impact will be.

Honestly, I think the whole affair was unfortunate and probably could've been avoided or handled better if the Mi Rack developer first reached out and sought permission, or clarified the license agreement terms upfront with the various developers and involved parties. I don't think the guy meant to violate any license agreements and it was an honest mistake (example: 'hey these are open source - I can port these to the iPad'), but I totally understand how that got us where we are. For better or worse.

topaz · Post by **topaz** » Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:40 pm

Thats certainly one way of looking at it.

From the other side I and many others see it different. but hey.. thaaaats life.

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:37 pm

I don't think one has anything to do with the other.

The basic story, as I understand it, was something like (and I'm just paraphrasing and recapping here - if any involved parties want to jump in to clarify - feel free, I'm not saying this version of events is 100% accurate and the involved parties may see things differently and not agree on the facts anyway)...

1. The Mi Rack developer looked at the 0.6 VCV Rack license and said, "oh, I can port this to iOS and release it for a few bucks" - nothing necessarily wrong with that, but this rubbed some people the wrong way. The 1.x version of Rack uses a different license that wouldn't allow for this, but the 0.6 version was more permissive.

2. The Mi Rack developer ported open source modules, and went so far as to include those license agreements and even donation links in the Mi Rack port. But again, didn't ask permission in advance. Seems most developers were generally ok with this, but some others may not have appreciated their work to go into someone else's commercial product without any kind of head's up.

3. In at least some instances, the license agreement for the ported VCV modules covered the code, but not the graphics. So the Mi Rack guy was actually in violation of some license terms when he ported graphics he wasn't authorized to use - at least for some modules.

4. Then came a whole back on forth on "derivative art." The Mi Rack developer changed the graphics, but the original designer still wasn't pleased and felt the new work was still derivative. My understanding is whoever owned the graphics basically asked that the fundamentals be taken down due to the artwork. Don't know if Andrew (VCV creator) did too, but he was very unhappy with how this was handled. There's a post from him clarifying the new VCV Rack license and why it was chosen on their forums. Anyway, the Mi Rack developer also aired some private conversations with the graphic designer in at least one public forum. Not a great move IMO.

5. Ultimately, the Fundamentals modules were pulled from Mi Rack. Existing patches can still be loaded with them. But if you search for Fundamentals in Mi Rack, you mostly get the Bog Audio stuff. Not the VCV stuff. Seems like a decent compromise to me.

6. Due to the more restrictive VCV Rack license agreement with the v1 work, there would've been no way for Mi Rack to have continued with things like polyphony, new modules, etc. At least, not without some kind of blessing from the various developers. So Mi Rack was always destined to be a port of an older version of the code-base.

7. In response to Topaz, I'm not sure how pulling the Fundamentals modules from Mi Rack has anything to do with future sales of VCV Rack v2. Mi Rack was never a true VCV Rack on iOS port. Who knows, one day we may still see that but as mentioned above, Mi Rack was always based on an older codebase and wouldn't have been possible at all with the v1 code. Unless you just mean that the VCV Rack reputation may have been harmed as a result of this. If so, I'm not sure how big the impact will be.

Honestly, I think the whole affair was unfortunate and probably could've been avoided or handled better if the Mi Rack developer first reached out and sought permission, or clarified the license agreement terms upfront with the various developers and involved parties. I don't think the guy meant to violate any license agreements and it was an honest mistake (example: 'hey these are open source - I can port these to the iPad'), but I totally understand how that got us where we are. For better or worse.

Funkybot's Evil Twin · Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:46 pm

topaz wrote: ↑Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:40 pm Thats certainly one way of looking at it.

From the other side I and many others see it different. but hey.. thaaaats life.

I don't necessarily love the way the whole thing went down either, but it's not my IP and not my fight. It would've been great if a happy resolution could've been met, but that's not where this ended up as sometimes happens.

I don't feel like I need to take sides. I'll still use Mi Rack, and I'll still use VCV Rack.

Holy Crap - VCV Rack (with all MI Modules) ported to iOS/iPAD!